In 2003 many leading people backed the invasion of Iraq as legally justified and a step forward for humanity. They were proved wrong as this letter shows.
Dear War Supporter,
In 2003 you assured us that the US-led invasion of Iraq was justified on the grounds that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction which threatened the US. You also predicted that under US guidance Iraq would soon be mirroring Japan’s post war road to prosperity.
Today, the US occupation of Iraq is almost universally seen as a disaster. Had WMDs been found, or had some kind of link between the Iraqi dictatorship and 9/11 been established, or indeed had the level of human suffering in Iraq been reduced, then perhaps there would still be independent people weighing up the merits of the invasion.
The Iraqi adventure has also had negative geo-political consequences. First, it has given a boost to Islamic-based terrorism; the July 2005 bombings in London for instance would almost certainly not have happened without the Iraqi stimulus. Second, the invasion of Iraq and Bush’s ‘axis of evil’ speech have strengthened Iranian resolve to acquire nuclear weapons, while at the same time the growth of shia power in a broken-backed Iraq has strengthened Tehran’s hand in the region.
Of course you could cynically argue that at a cost of over 3000 US lives (and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi ones) plus the loss of world public support for the US, it is now the case that America has its military in the country in the world with the second highest reserves of oil. But even this is surely a phyric victory.
I was just wondering on your thoughts today.